herb wrote:
While Ballard performed markedly better this year than last, the injury bug has bit him again (three concussions in his two years here I believe, plus the knee injury last year) and more importantly Salo has played very well. Hamhuis, Bieksa and Edler clearly aren't going to be moving down the depth chart anytime soon, so that left Ballard on the 3rd pairing again.

There is nothing wrong with playing on the third pairing of a team like the Canucks. EVTOI for Ballard isn't that much less than the guys on the top 4. It is all in the special teams, and to be honest, in those games where Edler has been brutal on the point and can't get the puck to stay on his stick and the PP is forever resetting to avoid offsides, Ballard should have been given a chance.

At this point of the year, IF Ballard wasn't on the IR, I would expect Vigneault to up his minutes and be resting Hamhuis, Bieksa, Salo, and Edler, as much as possible. Particularly Salo. the playoffs are just around the corner, and let's be honest here, no team in the West besides maybe the number 8 seed, is going to be an EASY series. And right now we are in 2nd, and not guaranteed to finish on top as St. Louis has their engine fine tuned at the moment.

Meds wrote:
A good first pass and the ability to see the offensive possibilities through a forecheck, or carry the puck with some degree of control out of the zone after a hard press by the opponent, are as important to defense as they are to offense. Rome can do none of those things.

Meds wrote:
A good first pass and the ability to see the offensive possibilities through a forecheck, or carry the puck with some degree of control out of the zone after a hard press by the opponent, are as important to defense as they are to offense. Rome can do none of those things.

I know, I know, stats don't tell the whole story, but at the very least they make for an interesting debate on style vs effectiveness or the quiet effectiveness of certain players.

I think you let useless numbers go to your head a little too much.

Aaron Rome is a -4 +/- on the season. Edler is a +2.

Edler has a total of 1219 minutes of EV/TOI this year. Rome has 545. That means that over the course of more than double the amount of ice time Rome has been on for more goals against vs. goals for than Edler. We've all watched enough Canuck's games this year to know that when Edler is on the ice and the Canucks score, he was involved in the play in the offensive zone at least half the time. We also know that Rome is lucky to have been involved in the play in the offensive zone even 25% of the time.

Now, of course you are going to argue that if Rome was on for another 500 minutes or so he would be the benefactor of a few more Canucks goals padding his plus/minus numbers. I'll counter that now by saying it is unlikely because when he is on the ice, the Canucks are often chasing the puck back into their own end because he screwed it up at the line. The Canucks also don't transition as fluidly from defense to offense when Rome is the guy making that outlet pass (or turning it over at the blueline).

Meds wrote:
A good first pass and the ability to see the offensive possibilities through a forecheck, or carry the puck with some degree of control out of the zone after a hard press by the opponent, are as important to defense as they are to offense. Rome can do none of those things.

I know, I know, stats don't tell the whole story, but at the very least they make for an interesting debate on style vs effectiveness or the quiet effectiveness of certain players.

I think you let useless numbers go to your head a little too much.

Aaron Rome is a -4 +/- on the season. Edler is a +2.

Edler has a total of 1219 minutes of EV/TOI this year. Rome has 545. That means that over the course of more than double the amount of ice time Rome has been on for more goals against vs. goals for than Edler. We've all watched enough Canuck's games this year to know that when Edler is on the ice and the Canucks score, he was involved in the play in the offensive zone at least half the time. We also know that Rome is lucky to have been involved in the play in the offensive zone even 25% of the time.

Now, of course you are going to argue that if Rome was on for another 500 minutes or so he would be the benefactor of a few more Canucks goals padding his plus/minus numbers. I'll counter that now by saying it is unlikely because when he is on the ice, the Canucks are often chasing the puck back into their own end because he screwed it up at the line. The Canucks also don't transition as fluidly from defense to offense when Rome is the guy making that outlet pass (or turning it over at the blueline).

These numbers are "adjusted" to take into account differences in TOI, zone starts, etc. They are also fact based, not opinion based. They also don't speak to Edler or Rome's offence, but to their two way play.

The point is Edler's weakness is defence, but makes up for it in offence. Rome's weakness is offence, but makes up for it in quietly effective defence. One gets raked by some for his weakness, while the other does not.

Chiarelli was on record last week as using these "useless numbers". Gillis and Vigneault have also alluded to using them to evaluate players and games.

These stats seem important to the top managers in pro hockey when jobs and millions of dollars are on the line. But useless to you?

There's a reason Rome played over Ballard last year and a reason he plays more than some like this year. And it's not because Vigneault is a dummy or plays favourites. Dummy's don't have Vigneault's success.

I understand what's going on in here, but if you just take a step back for a moment, it's somewhat comical that Aaron Rome is now being compared to Alex Edler.

On Rome:

IMO, Rome is a near perfect #6/7 guy. He's dirt cheap, but he's effective enough to do pretty much everything that AV asks of him well enough to stay in that slot (despite the Mount Everest of purely subjective anecdotal evidence that meds is climbing).

He's tough to boot, and doesn't take a shitload of useless penalties (SOB, anyone?). By all accounts, he's also a good fit in the room - an item of no small importance to our GM.

His two major weaknesses - keep in mind that you're talking about expectations of a #6D - are that he struggles on the right side and that he can't effectively elevate his game to take spot duty in the T4.

Ok, so think about this for a sec: if Rome could really do those things, he'd be a T4 defender on a shitty club that would pay him 4x or 5x or 6x what he's getting now. But he can't overcome those issues, so he plays for us.

No matter what the fans think, the coach trusts him and he certainly seems to meet the expectations of our GM. The contract extension and Larry's numbers are some proof of that.

So, wtf exactly do people expect from Aaron freaking Rome?

On a team like the Nucks, he's a weak link compared to everyone else, so I get that he gets some flack from fans, but c'mon, most GM's would trip over themselves to acquire a player like this.

The issue at hand is really not with the player, it's with the coach, and his unreasonable and unwavering desire to use Rome over (GTHB poster perceived) better assets, namely Ballard.

Like everyone else in the world, I have no palatable answers for this, except to note that Ballard often opts for high-risk plays over safe ones (the ones that Rome opts for). Ballard has been more effective this season, yes, but still: the amount of risk taken versus the reward received means he's still not trusted by AV.

Ballard was making strides against Rome by upping his toughness - at least in his willingness to fight - but he's now recovering from yet another concussion. That's obviously a problem when your way out of the doghouse is to play the role of punchingbag.

I'm fine with Rome - used properly. Like I said, a near perfect #6/7 dman culled from the marketplace.

My problem in this scenario is with AV, and with MG's inability to find the 3rd RH Dman.

It wasn't term that got Ehrhoff it was the 40 million and the front loading. The term just made it cap friendly for the Sabres. The Sabres don't make that deal, for 40 million, unless they get term. I'm sure Ehrhoff would have just as easily taken the 40 million and the front loading on a 5-6 year deal.

For the Canucks they were not about to give him a 10 year deal and they were not about to pay him 40 million and they were not about to front load and pay 10 million this year. There was no way in hell MG would even contemplate that type of deal for an Ehrhoff. And if he had I doubt there would be too many, if any, Canucks fans happy abut it. I mean we could ignore all sorts of things and say well its cap friendly and he can be buried when the time comes and all of that but I still doubt that you would fine anyone seriously happy and out the deal. Except maybe RD.

Larry Goodenough wrote:
These numbers are "adjusted" to take into account differences in TOI, zone starts, etc. They are also fact based, not opinion based. They also don't speak to Edler or Rome's offence, but to their two way play.

Speaking about a players "two way play" DOES speak about a players offence. Two ways... Defence AND Offence.

Larry Goodenough wrote:
The point is Edler's weakness is defence, but makes up for it in offence. Rome's weakness is offence, but makes up for it in quietly effective defence. One gets raked by some for his weakness, while the other does not.
.

No. Simply no. He does not have quality effective defence.

If I were to accept this fact ( which i'm finding impossible at this point in the season) you cannot compare the differences in the players game. I understand that point you are trying you make " Hey Romer gets shit for being out of position (or w.e) on a goal, Edler has a gaff on a goal, they should both get shit for it".

You're right all players should get called out when there play results directly (or in directly) to a goal, regardless of what they are doing at the other end of the ice. If Edler is fuck up the same game that Rome fucks up, they most certainly should both be seen as gaffs and should both be wearing Goat Horns for their respective gaffs/goals. But that's where the breakdown of a game usually ends for Rome. You say " Yeah he tried to make a pass up the middle which led to a goal"(Rome), whereas the game anaylsis goes on for Edler. "Alex did fall down coming back, but he had two points and essentially won the game for the team". You can't discount one from the other when talking about TWO WAY PLAY.

You can't compare AR's offensive skillset to AE's defensive skillset because that's somewhat absurd. The gap between AE's defensive game and AR's offensive game is tremendous.

(Just to point out the "out of position" stuff were purely just semantics and are not concrete examples of them "fucking" up)

The Hockey Analysis site has its own rating system based on goals rather than looking at Corsi or Fenwick numbers (although it also has those numbers posted). The rating system looks at how the player is doing compared to the league average, which to me is a more readily grasped concept.

When you look at how the defence is doing this year overall compared to the last couple of years for 5v5, Edler is not contributing quite as much to goals for, but he is having a bad year for him on the defensive side of the game, and statistically you certainly can argue that he has on average been almost as bad as Rome in 5v5 situations (and yes these numbers do take into account zone starts, and which players including goalies you are playing with and against). Why Edler would have been picked as an all star ahead of Hamhuis is one of the great mysteries. We can only hope that he finds some consistency at the last couple of year's level come the playoffs.

Rome is doing better on the offensive side than the last couple of years, but is even worse defensively than the last couple of years, and when you look at the top teams in league rankings, you would be hard pressed to find a worse number 5 or 6 defenceman than Rome based on the stats.

BTW, this year, for Detroit, every number for every defenceman that has played over 400 min is over 1. St. Louis’ numbers are not quite as good as Detroit’s.

HARO: Hockey Analysis Rating for Offense
HARD: Hockey Analysis Rating for Defense
HART: Hockey Analysis Rating for Total (average of HART and HARD)
For these ratings, a rating of 1.00 indicates when the player is on the ice his performance should be similar to league average performance. For example, if a player had a HARO of 1.00, one should expect he will contribute to goals at approximately the league average rate. Anything above 1.00 is better than average and anything below 1.00 is below average. For HARD, 1 is the leagure average for contributing to goal prevention.

Meds wrote:
Alberts is at least on par with Rome (I literally am scared shitless every time I see either one of them down below the other team's goalline).

You... literally... SHIT YOUR PANTS??!!

Meds wrote:
If Ballard doesn't ask from a trade I'll be shocked, and that would also speak volumes about his character IMO, to stay where you aren't getting a fair shake from the coach but are willing to grin and bear it just to help the team however you can, that's a player I want on the roster.

So you heard how excited Botch was about how the Canucks 'NOW HAVE 3 SHUT DOWN LINES'. Exciting shit. Not sure why others around here are not as excited about shut down hockey as Botch and I are. To be honest, I'm hoping we trade Schneids for a Shut Down specialists. I know we already have Malhotra, Pahlsson and Lappy but seriously, you cannot ever have enough SHUT DOWN in the line-up, it's more valuable than skill.

"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate